SpaceX Fails A Third Time To Land Falcon 9 On Barge

kerbal space program is an awesome game. playing it you will come to understand all the mechanics of rocket science and why what they are attempting is so hard to do. very recommended.
 
Dead Parrot said:
I have wondered for a while if the weight of a 5th leg outweighs(literally) the stability advantages. With 5, any one can fail and it would still be somewhat stable.
Click to expand...

RAIL5? Redundant Array of Independent Legs?
 
USMCGrunt said:
I'm curious though, with rough seas and an object THAT long with those short legs, it seems like even if they landed it with no problem, the thing would still potentially tip over during transport. Why not create some sort of capture system that would stabilize the rocket from the mid/top section? They don't have a problem with precision locating the rocket, they just have a problem at this point with it staying upright once they're near the ground.
Click to expand...
Once that first stage has burned all the fuel, it's *very* tail-heavy. You've got nine engines, plus all the turbopumps and other equipment, sitting down there. It's actually quite stable. Once it's on the ground/platform, it's gonna stay put. Keep in mind that when it launches, it's sitting on a far narrower base, albeit on land.
 
Putting a rocket on a boat NOT head first is an accomplishment in my books. You had me at booster first.
 
dangerouseddy said:
seems a bit doomed to failure unless the sea is as calm as a mill pond
Click to expand...

I dunno dude, we used to have accidents on carriers all the time. But today we can land unmanned planes on the deck, thanks to advancements in GPS and the increases in compute power available.

http://news.usni.org/2013/11/22/navy-completes-initial-development-new-carrier-landing-system

First, they introduced instrument landing system, and that made things safer than just dead reckoning.

And now we've added complex GPS sensors to give pilots/software a complete picture of the location and state of the carrier. This improves pilot safety, and has the potential to remove the pilot for the look completely!

I foresee similar progress can be made with this water landing as well. Each attempt has gotten closer to the goal. And even if the success percentage is never that high, it doesn't have to be - you can adjust your wholesale launch price for your average successful landing rate!

If it saves you 14 million 30% of all launches, you'd bet your ass it would be worth it :D

It's the same reason the Navy has invested so much money in making landings safer - both the pilots and planes are too damned expensive to lose! Space X will find the right balance of cost versus success rates, you can be sure.

They already landed one on solid ground. This is only a little harder than that :D
 
They've stated that excessive icing on the leg is the probable cause of the failure.
 
Mohonri said:
Once that first stage has burned all the fuel, it's *very* tail-heavy. You've got nine engines, plus all the turbopumps and other equipment, sitting down there. It's actually quite stable. Once it's on the ground/platform, it's gonna stay put. Keep in mind that when it launches, it's sitting on a far narrower base, albeit on land.
Click to expand...

duh....I shoulda thought of that.
 
Isn't the whole one piece ship returning ripped off from the old 70's TV show "Salvage 1"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top